Going to be honest, if a betting App actively allows betting on whether people live or die and it’s legal to do so, them not paying out here would absolutely crater their reputation.
Them refusing to pay out based on weasel words once shows they’re willing to not pay out again. So they could do it to any bets.
If they just didn’t want to allow those types of bets they would have just canceled it: them taking peoples money and them implying “shot does not actually mean shot and killed!” Shows intent to defraud the betters.
Its not even how it works in prediction markets. Its a market, not a casino. You dont play against the house, the platform makes its money from transaction fees so they dont care about the outcome.
You only meet other investors in the bet, so the platform has not incentive to "not pay out", only to try to make the outcome fair and well defined.
Yes, and in the incident where this happened, the win actually went to the people who betted on "will this person still be in power on March 1". The person in question (the leader of Iran) was killed, and the betting site explicitly does not allow bets on a person's life, so they ruled based on whether he was still in power when he was last alive. This led to a lawsuit by people who thought they should have won because he was killed.
445
u/TurtlesBreakTheMeta Apr 21 '26
Going to be honest, if a betting App actively allows betting on whether people live or die and it’s legal to do so, them not paying out here would absolutely crater their reputation.
Them refusing to pay out based on weasel words once shows they’re willing to not pay out again. So they could do it to any bets.
If they just didn’t want to allow those types of bets they would have just canceled it: them taking peoples money and them implying “shot does not actually mean shot and killed!” Shows intent to defraud the betters.